Optical Viewfinders? Why is it that every time I think I've found a camera that perfectly suits my needs, it doesn't have an optical viewfinder. Like the Canon SX-110 IS. I realize that most amateur photographers just point and shoot and therefore don't need anything more than the LCD display. But I can't believe that there aren't a lot of consumers like myself that prefer being able to steady the camera against my face as I compose a shot. Especially useful in bright daylight. This is very disappointing. This the fifth camera that I've seriously considered purchasing this year, but backed out when I discovered that it didn't have an optical viewfinder. Come on, Canon. How much more would it have really cost you to include one for folks like me? Optical Viewfinders? Why is it that every time I think I've found a camera that perfectly suits my needs, it doesn't have an optical viewfinder. Like the Canon SX-110 IS. I realize that... » Read More Optical Viewfinders? Why is it that every time I think I've found a camera that perfectly suits my needs, it doesn't have an optical viewfinder. Like the Canon SX-110 IS. I realize that most amateur photographers just point and shoot and therefore don't need anything more than the LCD display. But I can't believe that there aren't a lot of consumers like myself that prefer being able to steady the camera against my face as I compose a shot. Especially useful in bright daylight. This is very disappointing. This the fifth camera that I've seriously considered purchasing this year, but backed out when I discovered that it didn't have an optical viewfinder. Come on, Canon. How much more would it have really cost you to include one for folks like me? « Show Less
15258
I agree...I'm searching for business use, and the PowerShots seem to fit my needs for everything other than not having a viewfinder! Most people at the office won't care, but I am the primary photographer here and get better pictures when I use a viewfinder. I personally own a Sony Cybershot with about the same megapixels and optical zoom, and it takes excellent pictures, but the memory card type and the cost of the camera don't fit my needs here at work. Have either of you found anything else comparable with a viewfinder? Part of what I need is good close-up shots, as well as overall quality good enough for a publication. I agree...I'm searching for business use, and the PowerShots seem to fit my needs for everything other than not having a viewfinder! Most people at the office won't care, but I am the primary photographer here and get better pictures when I use a viewfinder. I personally own a Sony Cybershot with about the same megapixels and optical zoom, and it takes excellent pictures, but the memory card type and the cost of the camera don't fit my needs here at work. Have either of you found anything else comparable with a viewfinder? Part of what I need is good close-up shots, as well as overall... » Read More I agree...I'm searching for business use, and the PowerShots seem to fit my needs for everything other than not having a viewfinder! Most people at the office won't care, but I am the primary photographer here and get better pictures when I use a viewfinder. I personally own a Sony Cybershot with about the same megapixels and optical zoom, and it takes excellent pictures, but the memory card type and the cost of the camera don't fit my needs here at work. Have either of you found anything else comparable with a viewfinder? Part of what I need is good close-up shots, as well as overall quality good enough for a publication. « Show Less
15259
I haven't found one that perfectly suits my needs yet, though I am considering the Canon PowerShot SD780IS 12.1Here's a link to it on Amazon:http://tinyurl.com/q56h7qBut I'm holding out for something better until the end of this year. In which case I'll probably go with the Canon.
948240
"Neither the SX10 nor SX1 will keep up with any decent DSLR in image quality and surely not in low light, they just don't have the image sensor size"Yes, C. Jones, that is a given! If you want the convenience of a P&S; you have to still give up some of the features of a good SLR...at least for now.
391681
Look up "canon chdk". It's a firmware that you load from your sd card. I'm getting optical zoom in my SD800IS, along with many other features, like shooting in raw, and control over shutter speed. For those cameras with aperture control (mine just has a NS filter), you can even adjust that.Still, I really like the looks of the SX1 coming out. I'm going to start saving for Christmas now.
274310
I have an SD 800is and really like it. It takes great pictures. I have taken over 1000 during the last year. The wide angle lens is a must have. The LCD display really works good too. One of the reasons I bought it was for the optical view finder. Because the display is so good even on bright days, I have never used it. Older digital cameras with less brightness required the optical view finder. I really don't see much of a reason to for it on the cameras.If I were going to buy another new camera this year I'd get the SD 870is. It is a newer design and has some improvements. I think you should by the best camera you can. If dpreview thinks it's a better camera, I'd bet that it really is. I have an SD 800is and really like it. It takes great pictures. I have taken over 1000 during the last year. The wide angle lens is a must have. The LCD display really works good too. One of the reasons I bought it was for the optical view finder. Because the display is so good even on bright days, I have never used it. Older digital cameras with less brightness required the optical view finder. I really don't see much of a reason to for it on the cameras.If I were going to buy another new camera this year I'd get the SD 870is. It is a newer design and has some improvements. I... » Read More I have an SD 800is and really like it. It takes great pictures. I have taken over 1000 during the last year. The wide angle lens is a must have. The LCD display really works good too. One of the reasons I bought it was for the optical view finder. Because the display is so good even on bright days, I have never used it. Older digital cameras with less brightness required the optical view finder. I really don't see much of a reason to for it on the cameras.If I were going to buy another new camera this year I'd get the SD 870is. It is a newer design and has some improvements. I think you should by the best camera you can. If dpreview thinks it's a better camera, I'd bet that it really is. « Show Less
2009521
I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a DSLR. They're wrong! Lumix provides all you need with a Leica lens. I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a... » Read More I'm a bit of a lens snob too, being a contax shooter. I bought the Lumix fz50 for my wife and it arrived yesterday, and let me tell you, it is fantastic; best digital camera I've ever held. We considered the nikon d80, but my wife preferred the LCD preview on the Lumix, and although it is easy to use, the manual options are versatile. FZ50 is not lighter than the nikon, but on the other hand, it has a 420mm Leica lens, so it does the job of two lenses.The price is incredibly low, I think because once you get out of the 300 dollar range, people think they need skip over to a DSLR. They're wrong! Lumix provides all you need with a Leica lens. « Show Less
964769
Hello Mary: To begin with, the camera you have is a Point & Shoot model (P&S), or all-in-one type. These kind of cameras are convenient because you can take them anywhere - in a pocket, purse, or whatever. But they have tremendous image quality tradeoffs and they employ a very, very small sensor. They often wind up displaying more levels of image noise and other artifacts than more advanced models. The GX1 is a Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Model of camera. It employs a much larger sensor and this translates into much larger per pixel sizes. As a result, the GX1 displays much less noise and does very, very well at much higher ISO scenarios. Yet it is still a very light camera, and depending on the type of lens you put on it, it can also be very compact. Now, most people who have a small P&S camera and want to "move up" tend to initially be leery about getting a larger, more advanced model. But you shouldn't be. This GX1 (I have two of them because it is such a nice model) will net you pictures that can knock your socks off - it's that good. When you get one, you can just put your camera into Program or Automatic mode, which means the camera makes all the decisions for you. But as you gain more knowledge, the camera grows with you, and once you really know what you're doing (assuming you're an amateur), the GX1 will really open up your eyes to what it can do. I can't speak highly enough of it and I do lots of photo work in various scenarios. I currently use around 20 different advanced cameras, yet the GX1 is one of my favorite models. And lately, with the almost "give-away" prices, you'd be a fool not to get one. If you want to see some photo samples taken with the GX 1, you can just email me at: benherrmann@centurylink.net and I'll gladly send you some so you can see the rich color tonality and nice definition of photos that this camera can generate. Ben Herrmann Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
2073016
Yes, your words are elegant. All I did was point to a fine review where you can compare the inferior images from the Rebel to SX1. If you want the real benefits of an SLR with video then go to a fine machine like Nikon D90. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX1_IS/
132028
When it comes to actually making great photos, there simply is no comparison. Don't get me wrong- the 5R is a great camera. But without a viewfinder and the ability to optimally brace your elbows against your body as you watch your subject through the viewfinder and s-q-u-e-e-z-e the shutter, it is difficult to get good shots. The NEX-6 with the 16-50mm zoom is the closest you will get to the quality of image you would get from a DSLR - but in a package you can stuff into a jacket pocket. There are many people who buy the 5R, and then realize it's difficult seeing the LCD screen in bright daylight. They then have to invest in the optional EVF, which drives the whole package higher than if they just bought the NEX-6 to begin with.
363697
I was worried about not having a view-finder on my digital camera when I first switched to the Nikon l1. And really, it hasnt bothered me at all. You can always adjust the brightness of the screen so you can see the image and its got a matte not glossy screen so you are not reflected in the image. I've had to buy a new camera since mine got stolen, and I find that the swivel abilties of the s10 will come very handy if you are concerned with the LCD screen.
2055080
I agree absolutely!!! I don't see how a camera can get such a high rating without one. Are people just using it inside or after dark? No eyepiece almost completely negates its usefulness for outdoor activities.
201432
Yes. Personally I would not buy a camera that did not have one. Fuji calls it EVF, Electronic ViewFinder. A digital camera does not have optical viewfinder; instead the digital image can be displayed on the LCD screen or electronic viewfinder. (A switch on the back of the camera is used to choose where the image is displayed.) I always use the EVF to take the picture and the LCD to view the pictures I have taken. Having the camera up to the eye is more stable than holding the camera out at arms length to see the LCD. I highly recommend this camera.
287473
I haven't tried it in bright sunlight, yet. Good question though, as I hadn't thought about the lack of a normal viewfinder. Might hold on to my old camera just in case, it took great daytime shots but was poor in low light situations.
263011
I would like a viewfinder too. I suspect it may be difficult to do one well on a 12x zoom. Viewfinders are a little inaccurate even on 4x zooms. So, it may be that the cost would be prohibitive.
1106219
Who uses optical viewfinders anymore? They are inherently inferior to the LCD viewfinder:* LCD gives you WYSIWYG whereas the optical doesn't take zoom or other effects into account; it's guesswork with optical.* Optical only allows one eye to see the shot; LCD allows both your eyes, so you don't have to squint one of them.* LCD can display histograms and other on-the-fly info about the shot so you can be a much better photographer.You may want to move on from your 1950's camera mindset to adapt to modern technological innovations. You'll be happier.
1874389
Hi Yadid: I can't speak about other dSLRs, but I have to say that I really enjoy the tilting screen on the A300/A350. I didn't expect to use it very often, but I have found myself using it as a waist level viewfinder quite often. The fact that Sony's design, which uses a secondary sensor, allows you to focus while in the live-view mode puts it head and shoulders above the competition in my opinion. Most of the competing live-view technologies have to autofocus after the mirror flips up, so the Sony system is quicker to use. I never owned the A2, but I owned the Dimage 5 and 7 predecessors, which used many of the same components, including the lens. Either the A300 or A350 will offer quicker performance and better low-light capabilities. Image quality will depend on lens choice. The Minolta GT lens on the A2 was an excellent performer, so you will need to carefully evaluate which lenses you choose. Some people slam Sony for not offering as much in the way of lenses, but what they do offer is generally very good. In addition, you can choose from almost all the Minolta AF lenses. Some of these are mediocre, but Minolta also offered some truly excellent optics, as you know from your A2. Try http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta or http://www.dyxum.com for some in depth information on A-mount lenses available from Sony and Minolta. As far as a higher-end camera, you didn't say what you were hoping to do with your images. The A700 is a suburb instrument, and it offers many features not available on the A300 or A350. It costs quite a bit more however. Unless you need some of the things the A700 offers, (faster continuous shooting, higher-resolution LCD, PC Sync port, tethered-shooting, etc.) you might be better off buying the A300 or A350 and spending more on high quality lenses. Good luck, I hope this is helpful. --Tom Bonner
154000
I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little faster than the rest of the pack. I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little... » Read More I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little faster than the rest of the pack. « Show Less
1097535
Unfortunately, viewfinders are almost non-existent in non-slr cameras, including this one. Great camera, but if you're nearsighted or the viewscreen is in bright light the image can be hard to see without glasses or a hood.